Why is that weird? If I have an account, that has been given access to some resource, it makes sense that I can remove access to that resource myself, just like the admin could. It is my account after all.
Imagine if someone could invite you to a calendar event, but you can't clear it from your own calendar if you say no. How does that make sense?
There was recently a spam group that would use Google Calendar Events to spam you in your calendar. They stopped for a while ago, seems like Google needs more spammers like these in order to get this problem solved.
In this case it’s not about rectification (the information is factually correct), but you can remove your consent to the processing our your personal data for this purpose.
I'd think the admin should know if their delegate doesn't want to be so, before the time comes they're needed. The current system seems set up as 'oh, you can't login, let's ask your ex you just had a bitter divorce with for help', which isn't great for either party.
As a developer with pretty good product instincts, my first reaction is always “WTH? Why did someone implement this” and then there is someone in the comments who defends the situation and thinks this is the way it SHOULD be implemented.
That’s the best part about these problem reports on HN: It answers those Why would and Who would questions.
Imagine if someone could invite you to a calendar event, but you can't clear it from your own calendar if you say no. How does that make sense?